@ shamarone
there is another famous track designer in case you never heard of him - Alan Wilson. he designs tracks like Barber Motorsports Park, Miller Motorsports Park, even he was responsible for the upgrade work on Mont-Tremblant (which i consider the best place for F1 in Canada and not Montreal).
to those who deride Tilke, bear in mind - of course he produced many of bland tracks, but i think he learned his lesson well. just look at Buddh International Circuit, instantly a drivers' and fans' favourite. even if it means he will design many future tracks, i just hope this trend will continue for a long time.

forget about all those politics, forget about their little tradition in motor racing. the first thing for motogp (or even f1) to succeed in india - do they have a strong fan base?
look at malaysia for the finest example - not a big market for superbikes as majority motorcycles are in form of moped or scooters. yet the malaysian GP are still there since 1991 thanks to a strong fan base and its popularity with the riders.
provided india can do the same, i do not see any reason why motogp cannot be successful in india.

@ Ro-dan
I share the same sentiment as you. why need to alternate with another gp from another country? it would be a better sense to have spanish gp shared between catalunya and valencia.
trackwise, i think they make the right choice. forget about all those conflict of interest at the first place - on the paper, paul ricard is a better track than magny-cours (only le mans is the best of all).
should this is true, then i would look forward to see the cars roaring along the mistral straight.

while i truly understand why some here prefer moto2 to follow WSS footsteps by having free choice of engines and electronics together with freedom to tune the engines, i have to say it will kill this class by itself should that happen.
engine, like the chassis, could be the silver bullet or the achilles heel for the teams and riders. any move to support expansive competitiveness in development (especially in the engine and electronics) can cause huge cost escalations. like we see in Marquez case in 2011, he would certainly run away with the title should the freedom of engine choice and its tuning is granted, since he has the backing of Repsol and that alone will give him advantage when it comes to the budget for tuning.
at that point of time, moto2 will become like what 250 was - 2-3 horse race instead of 12 horse race.
so which one you prefer then - single-engine multi-chassis class similar to formula ford in car racing, or multi-engine multi-chassis like formula three?

the change - as far as i can see - is mainly due to the customer support of the chassis and not because it is title-winning chassis of 2011.
face facts - Elias wins the 2010 title on a Moriwaki, yet during the winter many teams changed to Suter. So you can imagine how many are surprised when Bradl-Kalex combination won the title this year instead of Suter or Moriwaki, or even FTR.
it took more than just the right chassis to win in Moto2 - it will depend on the combination of the right chassis (with full support), right setup, right riding style, and even the right physique to produce the result.

it is quite ironic that despite being the most dominant (and favoured) Moto2 chassis in the past two years, Suter failed to win Riders' title. honestly, they will face that prospect again next year should they choose to build the bike around 1 rider (you know who) and give preferential treatment to certain customers/riders only.
i can say that Marc VDS made a wise choice by switching to Kalex. remember - last year VK Racing (and Bradl) make the same move, and many questioned their wisdom. yet where do they finished now?

@ Wolfy35
that is exactly my point. why Alstare need to withdraw when all those Suzuki teams without factory support still can race and become competitive? they still can run the Suzuki privately and do all the development work themselves without any assistance from Japan factory.
Crescent has show it can be done -even when stepping up the ladder from BSB to WSBK - and TAS also show it can be done. why Alstare can't follow suit?

i think CRT rule is just a stop-gap measure, to pressure those factories in order to have them eventually leasing a full-spec motogp engine to those privateers.
i can safely say that Dorna is making a very wise move this time. i also, have longed for motoGP to follow F1 where many chassis and engine specialists competing, not just full factory effort.

i am very sad by this news. Alstare is simply my favourite team in WSBK.
but it is very ironic that Crescent will step up from BSB to WSBK without any factory support that Alstare used to enjoy. why they cannot do the same? could it mean that Alstare depends to much on the factory? why they can't take a leaf out of Crescent's book?

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep
all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all
messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media
Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We
do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message,
and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable,
please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next
to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this
service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.